I’ll be upfront and admit to having little knowledge of the Civil War beyond who fought it and who won.
While I was reading here - (add www).cracked.com/article/208_5-battlefield-screw-ups-that-were-hilarious-until-people-died/ - in the third articloid they rag on General Wallace for: missing a massive battle, fortuitously coming up on the enemy’s rear flank but turining around and leaving and getting to the battle shortly after it was lost.
The Wikipedia bit I read about the battle suggested that Wallace had recieved orders to meet up somewhere and, somewhat confused, followed them.
So could the day’s battle have been won but for Wallace’ absence? And was Wallace a hapless putz or a hapless putz with orders?